Russellville City Council deadlocks in 4-4 vote to reinstate Public Works directorBy Sean IngramNews Editor

Morgan Barrett will not return as Russellville's director of Public Works.

The Russellville City Council deadlocked 4-4 during its vote Thursday night on a motion to reinstate Barrett. Aldermen needed a two-thirds majority vote in favor of reinstating Barrett and overturn Mayor Tyrone Williamson's decision to fire Barrett, and street department employee Brad Teeter, on July 2.

The council went into executive session 15 minutes after beginning Thursday night's regular meeting and after Alderman Phil Carruth made the motion, seconded by Cliff Kirchner. Barrett, attending the meeting with his attorney, Timm Murdoch, was called into the executive session at 6:28 p.m. and returned to the audience area a couple of minutes before the council returned at 7.

Carruth made the motion to reinstate Barrett to his position of three weeks ago, and requested a roll-call vote. Voting in favor of reinstating Barrett were Carruth, Cliff Kirchner, Randal Crouch and Scott Sanders. Voting against Barrett's reinstatement were Aldermen Robert Wiley, Faye Abernathy, Freddie Harris and Bill Eaton.

After the vote, Carruth promptly got up and left the council meeting through the back entrance.

Barrett's attorney, Timm Murdoch, said after Thursday night's meeting the council's vote was disappointing, and the governing body's was a loss for the city of Russellville.

"Unfortunately, the city chose from the very beginning not to interview Morgan, not to take a statement from him," Murdoch said. "That's the first time in 24 years in either any criminal, civil or internal investigation I've seen a conscious choice to do that. There's several bits of documentation, instances of direct contradiction in the city's own statements, where they contradict themselves. If the council doesn't spend enough time to find those things, you're left with a false impression.

"I think what happened here is, you start out with an assumption of guilt, then you look for facts to support that. I think that was the mindset that happened here. From what I understand, in the executive session, the focus was mostly on whether the firing was proper, unfortunately, some other issues got in there, too, which admittedly, there was no proof of those issues, but still that seemed to be a factor.

"Morgan will probably do better in the private sector than he does in the public sector. As we've already seen from the agenda, they're trying to replace him with two or three people. The city's going to find out in about a year just what they gave up tonight."

Murdoch said he didn't know what was said when Barrett was called into Thursday night's executive session. Barrett met with the council for 30 minutes of the 45-minute executive session.

"I gave him my file, anticipating, due to the fact he hasn't been allowed to give a statement, that he would give a statement and he might be asked specific questions about some memorandums that had been prepared by the city and the timeline he sent out by e-mail to the aldermen last week. I wanted him to have that information, so that it wouldn't be cold," the attorney said.

"There was one issue about the timing of when Morgan knew about the investigation. Morgan learned from an alderman that an allegation was made over a weekend, but didn't found out about an investigation until Monday, when he talked with [Police Chief] Tom McMillen. The city's documents seem to indicate that Morgan knew about the investigation at 8:30, but the documentation shows he didn't learn of it until 10:30. It seems like not a big deal right now, but it is a huge deal. In any event, when Morgan heard of the allegation, he talked to an employee and then went to talk to city hall. City Hall did not tell him it had started an investigation, and later on, he was accused of interfering with the investigation. It's difficult to interfere with something you don't know that's going on."

Murdoch was asked if statewide media attention of Barrett's firing would hamper his ability to find other employment in the private sector.

"It's disturbing, because these were personnel matters," the attorney said. "Comments were made while he was on administrative leave and still an employee of the city. His 13-year-old son was watching Channel 4 news, I think, on July 5 and he sees his dad's picture up there. He's accused of theft. Kristin [Clark Murdoch, Timm's wife] checked it out and talked with Channel 4, and they identified their two sources as The Associated Press wire and Russellville City Hall.

"To my knowledge, he's never been accused of theft, even in the comments that were made that shouldn't have been made. That's something we're looking into, and I'm not sure where that goes. It's unfortunate that we're where we are."

Murdoch said his client appreciated the "tremendous support" he received since his termination earlier this month.

Background

In a previous story written by Brooke Chambers, The Courier obtained a police report from Russellville City Hall through an Arkansas Freedom of Information Act request that stated Teeter was accused of stealing an undetermined amount of gasoline and various auto parts from the Pope County Complex, where all city and county employees garner fuel and materials for city and county use.

Williamson first learned of the alleged thefts during a June 14 phone call with an unnamed source. The police department was also contacted, and an internal investigation began, Human Resources Director Christi Williams said.

Williams said Barrett was not being accused of any criminal activity, and explained it was his "retaliation" to the investigation that prompted his termination.